Virginia Judge Voids Redistricting Amendment, Invalidates All Votes from Tuesday's Special Election Judge Jack Hurley struck down the Democratic-backed map as unconstitutional, blocking new districts; AG Jay Jones will appeal. Brett Meiselas Apr 22 A Virginia circuit court judge on Wednesday struck down the state’s voter-approved redistricting amendment in its entirety, ruling that the measure was unconstitutional from its inception and that every vote cast in Tuesday’s special election — for or against — is legally void. Judge Jack Hurley, a Republican appointee, entered the sweeping final judgment on April 22, granting relief to the plaintiffs on all counts. He declared the proposed constitutional amendment “void ab initio” — Latin for void from the start — and permanently enjoined state officials from certifying the election results or taking any steps to implement new congressional district maps. The decision represents a stunning reversal of fortunes for Democrats, who had championed the redistricting measure as a way to reshape Virginia’s congressional map and potentially flip seats now held by Republican incumbents. The ruling throws the state’s political landscape into immediate uncertainty, with the fate of the amendment now headed to the Court of Appeals. Wednesday’s ruling was not Hurley’s first attempt to stop the amendment. He issued similar rulings blocking the measure in January and again in February — and both times, the Virginia Supreme Court stepped in to allow the process to move forward while it considered the underlying legal questions. That court has yet to issue a final ruling in those earlier cases, meaning Democrats may find their fastest path to reversal runs not through the Court of Appeals, as Jones suggested, but through the Supreme Court, which is already familiar with the dispute. Attorney General Jay Jones, who took office in January, responded to the decision immediately. “My office will immediately file an appeal in the Court of Appeals,” he said. “As I said last night, Virginia voters have spoken, and an activist judge should not have veto power over the People’s vote. We look forward to defending the outcome of last night’s election in court.” Hurley claimed that the procedural violations underpinning the amendment were so fundamental that they infected every stage of the process, from the original legislative resolution to the design of the ballot itself. The judge ruled that HJR 6007 — the resolution that set the amendment in motion — was itself void from the start, having violated prior House Joint Resolutions and exceeded the scope of the call for the 2024 Special Session. The ruling also stated that Democrats had run afoul of a bedrock requirement of the Virginia Constitution: that any proposed constitutional amendment must pass through an intervening general election of the House of Delegates before it can be put to voters. That election, Hurley noted, cannot occur until 2027. The judge also lashed out at the referendum’s language on the ballot. Hurley declared it “flagrantly misleading,” finding that it failed to accurately describe the amendment as the General Assembly had actually passed it. He further said that early voting had opened on March 6 — short of the 90-day window the state constitution requires between legislative passage and a public vote. Plaintiffs in the case include Republican congressmen Ben Cline and Morgan Griffith, who argued that their districts would be unconstitutionally redrawn under the proposed maps. Hurley agreed, finding that both men faced irreparable harm and that the equities weighed in favor of a permanent injunction. The court’s order now bars state and local election officials from updating voter registration records, altering precincts or polling places, generating pollbooks or ballots, or proceeding with any primary or general election under the new congressional maps. The injunction binds not only current officeholders but their successors as well. Hurley denied the Commonwealth’s motion to dismiss, overruled its plea of immunity, and — in a move with immediate practical consequences — denied a motion to stay the ruling pending appeal. That means the block on certifying results is in force now, even as Jones moves to challenge the decision. Democrats cast Hurley’s intervention as extreme judicial overreach and activism, pointing to what they said was a clear popular mandate expressed at the ballot box on Tuesday. How quickly the Court of Appeals acts, and whether it grants an emergency stay while the case is fully briefed, will determine whether the redistricting fight has any practical effect on Virginia’s 2026 congressional elections. DOWNLOAD AND READ THE FULL DECISION 316KB ∙ PDF file